psychology issues. Like politics, if you do not care, someone else will
take over for you. At least some basic wisdom on how our own minds work
allows self-control, thanks to automation distanced subconscious, gaining
the ability to make explicit beliefs ingrained or implied first, and
turning consciousness our emotions instead of being directly determined by
them. This is consistent with the traditional role of men: one who masters
himself is able to govern his home and bypass shit tests.
Since at least the early twentieth century, and some strongly identified
Jewish leftists have slowly taken on the humanities. Psychology has not
escaped their grip as the comparative psychologists can talk. The object
culture of a Gramscis investigation, Bernays & # 8212; the nephew of Freud
& # 8212; laid the foundation not incidentally, one of the first
advertising campaign Bernays used powerful symbols of fire and freedom, to
attract women to smoke and heavy make "public relations". prostitutes as
their models.
Since then, the left sharpened its weapons, obtain a decisive advantage
over the less Machiavellian and generally spineless conservatives. Now,
because they use a wide range of psychological determinations such as
operant conditioning or giving freshness and fashionability on whatever
they want to shovel in the throat, they are going to reverse the charges.
Conservative voters are put under additional psychological monitoring,
analysis much less charitably, most criticized and denigrated, while the
Liberals themselves allow passing and fancy names as "public
relations", "management science", "human resources" , "social justice"
or "positive action" to act as memes manipulation covering.
In the words of Alex Jones, "there is a war for your mind," and here we
will cover one of the battlefields: the psychology and taboo uncleanliness.
Basically, the dirty is what carries risks of contamination, tampering,
impurity, and therefore should be avoided or treated with special attention.
The Scriptures have a long list of unclean things, if we talk of Leviticus
or Laws of Manu, and many primitive tribes used to isolate unrelated women
during their period because of dirty blood away. As for the taboo, it bears
a relationship with the direction of the dirt: if the mere mention of a
subject or pronounce certain words carry a risk, then it is best not to
mention the & # 8212; or follow the specific rules when handling, such as
the fight against the subject only by a particular frame or in a well
defined environment.
Leftists often enjoy taunting whatever sense of purity Conservatives again.
They perceive it as "outdated", should not be compared to, say, the sense
of hygiene of a modern surgeon. Yet far from "liberating" of this often
derided part of the human mind, libtards contemporaries have their own
sense of purity they have imposed on everyone. Like the Puritan yesterday
dares talk about sex without sin pertaining to the problem bearer glasses
now would not xieself joke by speaking of "Nazism".
The psychology itself
Disgust is a universal human emotion. Aside from toddlers and those who
have become accustomed to certain objects, everyone feels repulsion, for
example, cockroaches or eating feces. As psychologist Stephen Pinker
summarizes,
Although disgust is universal, the list of animals nondisgusting differs
from culture to culture, and that involves a learning process ... [Disgust]
is a simple adaptation to a basic fact about the living world: germs
multiply ... one germ, invisible, unverifiable and can multiply quickly
saturate a substance of any size. Since germs are, of course, transmitted
by contact, it is not surprising that nothing touches a yucky substance
itself is always disgusting, even if it looks and taste. Disgust is
intuitive microbiology. (How the mind works, Ch.6, "Food for thought")
As an instinctive phobia & # 8212; people are naturally phobic to
cockroaches, hairy, snakes or spiders & # 8212;, disgust can be easily
explained from an evolutionary standpoint. dangerous phobia has a
preventive role. Disgust what could bear eating disease or prevent coming
into close contact with it. It is better to have some false positives, ie
be disgusted by something not dangerous, than miss the mark and ingesting a
deadly poison.
It is possible to overcome the disgust and phobias, as it is possible to
overcome fear and act courageously in spite of it. Some are able to live in
close contact with scorpions or snakes, two animals that are well known as
instinctively feared. Also, throw in a risky situation or course bungee
jumping from a bridge are behaviors that go beyond instinct & # 8212; not
exactly the same, perhaps, but once atavistic and generally useful
limitation.
In traditional societies, many rites of passage meant to face his own fear:
a boy and even less in the dark for hours had to start his own fear of
loneliness or darkness. Sometimes go beyond the fear of something was
considered quite a feat for the "vanquisher" adopt or use the object of his
old fear. "The batmanism" Bruce Wayne is just an embodiment of this ancient
practice. (Tangentially, the object of fear can be reversed in a positive
spirit, while the object of disgust appears essentially repugnant and
therefore never casted out.)
Of course, disgust can go well beyond the fact dangerous for us living
beings and objects may vary culturally. A Muslim generally feels disgust at
the idea of eating pork, although well cooked ham shank is likely to be
healthier than some kebab dirty street. Here, Pinker argues that many foods
are not allowed to exclude the favorite food of the neighbor, thus
maintaining each separate tribe with its own eating habits.
Taboos are the social insurance which raises the shared disgust. It could
be argued that at least some traditional taboos were socially useful. The
Victorian touchiness about sex has prevented girls unleash their hypergamy.
Similarly, in medieval times, heresy was met with horror. Only priests were
allowed to read heretical texts and examine the potentially heretical
views, for example during the disputations (contradictory oral exams): they
had to be intelligent and gifted with a sufficient sense of good to be able
to examine, weigh and dispel heresy.
Illiterate, on the other hand, could not have such meaning and were likely
to "contamination" by bad ideas. This may sound elitist, but if you look at
how the European oecumena was really torn Protestantism and how much
antitradition shades could be an anti-heresy seems taboo ground, after
public support lost in retrospect Church justified for me.
How psychology was overturned
The cultural aspect of the rewritable taboo psychology has metapolitical
implications. Awareness campaigns aimed X to move public attention on X,
pushing for special supervision, and especially raise disgust or tamping
down. In 2015, a feminist attention by running successfully is a marathon
would prostitute during his time and showing the blood off. While the size
of its look to me the law can not be ignored, the running campaign and the
media around it for people déphotosensibilisantes so that we lose all
disgust menstrual blood or the show ordinary one.
Today, the major media campaign to trivialize pedophilia. One of their axes
is to paint as pedophiles human persons, arriving just nice to feel sexual
arousal to children: the predatory aspect is minimized and the impression
they create generates much less disgust the habit. Basically, any social
progressivism is to manipulate standards and simple feelings. Do you
remember that sodomy was considered repugnant before it is turned on
average for the top excitement?
Raising and falsification of disgust down, erasing taboos and create new
ones, are part of the toolbox of the social engineer. The more we let our
self behind in the name of "progress" & # 8212; or simply because the
consumption of the elite shows is much easier than pushing us & # 8212;
credulous and vacuum slateish we become. Journalists and experts are paid
to rewrite our brains in the name of the elite managers.
The 70s saw several leftist taboo transgression experiences and
desensitization to the screen. In 1972, the movie Pink Flamingos exposed
the adventures of a transsexual perform all sorts of repugnant acts,
stuffing pork tenderloin between the legs xis to eat dog poo in a
non-simulated scene, and other degenerate who dwell in human trafficking,
prostitution and friendship with homosexuals.
Two years later, a French director released a film in the same vein, much
more subtle: Going Places showed two living nomadic anti-hero lives,
committing petty crimes and running away, sometimes having sex with random
girls . One of the key scenes has a teenager who flees his
bourgeois "boring," the middle-class parents prefer to give her virginity
to the protagonists. Back in the US, 1975 saw the release of the Rocky
Horror Picture Show, a theater room four hours mixed with the film and with
transsexual characters as heroes.
All these movies intentionally violated the taboo around the normal and
commonplace trannyism degeneration. Not incidentally, all three are
considered "cult" and high artistic value by the baby boomers. Of course,
what the left and degenerate "artists" is something only they have the
right to do so: if I argue that the triumph of the will of Leni Riefenstahl
(1936) is beautiful and worship, and if I share the doubts about the truth
the official version of the Holocaust, a swarm of leftist probably call me
a "Nazi sympathizer" or a nasty troll. Indeed, in doing so, I would be
violating the taboo they have created around "Nazism" & # 8212; but why I
can not go beyond taboos and display disgust as well as they did? Because
according to their scenario, only they have the right to shape the culture
and rewrite standards.
As leftists desensitized, unmarked and pretended to "emancipate" the old
taboos, they also created disgust and awkwardness around things that were
normal before. Common post-1945 French language offers a variety of
expressions such as "sulfur position" or "people" sulfur "feel like the
fir," "fault" while applied to so-called position or the policy of far
right. Why such statements relating to the odor or dirt while intangible
ideas clearly can not? Well, because they activate and strengthen a
particular psychosocial conditioning.
Communist writer Bertol Brecht framed European traditions and their
advocates as a "filthy beast", and since then the term has been widely
reused by globalists. Nothing to do with the course & # 8212 result, which
is purely emotional, framing and custom packaging related, and that works.
Before you take the red pill, was not the dirtiness of "Nazism" seems
obvious? If you are really pilled red, it should be much less evident today.
How we can use it as well
Shakti, the Hindu personification of indefinite possibilities. A thousand
arms can get a lot
The first step is to free ourselves from the leftist conditioning. This
involves us away from, clearly identify and deconstructing the frames,
concepts and other reflexes that we have been "educated" with. Some of them
can be used, turning tools in our hands and not the limitations imposed on
the outside, some should be simply dismissed.
The second step is to develop our own cultural content and concepts. This
means, of course, re-reverse what had been reversed, and venture
into "forbidden territory. "The Alt-right has done a good job to reverse
the stigma against" fascism "by turning it into something fashy that looks
fashionable and takes a certain freshness instead of vegetating in the
wrong side of the system.
This also means that we must push for healthier standards. Fat-shaming is
good. Disgusting, complacent obese girls are unhealthy and unclean to all
views & # 8212; they should be ashamed. The same with pedophiles and
interbreeding that destroy the race. Make a healthier and feel more real
big common yet.
Before that, we need a little troll & # 8212; and which is lagging after
all, but our own version of the "revolution" and left the baby boomers
and "emancipation"?
In conclusion, I should like to make the following suggestion by a former
Liberal:
When an artist a crucifix submerged in a jar of his own urine or dung smear
elephant on an image of the Virgin Mary, made these works belong in art
museums? the artist can simply say religious Christians, "If you do not
want, do not go to the museum"? Or the mere existence of these works make
the world dirtier, more secular and more degraded?
If you can not see anything wrong here, try to reverse the policy. Imagine
a conservative artist created these works using images of Martin Luther
King Jr. and Nelson Mandela instead of Jesus and Mary. Imagine that his
intention was to mock almost deification by the left of many black leaders.
Might these works exhibited in museums in New York or Paris without
triggering angry demonstrations? Some may believe that the left-museum
itself had been contaminated by racism even after the paintings were
removed? (Jonathan Haidt, mind righteous chap.5)
If one believes that "Nazism" and defending his country are somehow dirty,
but sees nothing wrong with trannyism and being woken by children, it
deserves to be "triggered". Let's shape the unwritten rules of acceptable
and unacceptable, whatever the hysterical reactions we encounter, until
they are as they should be.
Read more: How Irrational Fear is used to control your behavior
No comments:
Post a Comment